Is it just me, or is whenever a product launch approaches, AppleInsider goes crazy with low credibility rumors and then dispels them with other sources of low credibility?
Actually, it happens all year long, regardless of whether or not there's an imminent product launch.
Apple, please don't ever get rid of the home button. Having a single, physical, 'reset' button is what allows a 2 year old child to use an iPad. i use both an iPad and a kindle fire. The fire is missing that button, and i (an adult) sometimes have trouble getting back to 'home'. I never really understood the attitude that a physical button is somehow inferior.
It looked like portrait. The invite is probably a mock-up and the home button got left out.
It looked like it wasn't an iPad. Either that, or somebody sure had teeny tiny fingers. Look at the size of that calendar icon. Then, put your finger near the calendar icon on your iPad. See how much smaller the icon is? I don't understand that invitation image at all, but then again, that's part of the genius of what Apple does. They do such a good job of making us wonder.
That "predictions" image is hilarious. I can't believe the guy put his name on it. I'd be embarrassed if I put my name on something that contained predictions like a "triangular design." Yes, yes, that settles it. Coming soon: the TriPad. The concept is so stupid it makes me laugh.
Samsung and LG already make TVs with bezel as small as 1mm. The tech is surely there.
For starters, 1mm isn't zero even though on a large TV it probably would look edge to edge. Secondly, we're talking about a device you handle. Besides the bezel and lip adding strength and rigidity having a handheld device that you have no choice but to have your hands blocking the display unless you support it underneath seems like a non-starter to me. Surely Apple could create a thinner iPad bezel but the current size seems good for allowing your thumbs clamp the top.
That "predictions" image is hilarious. I can't believe the guy put his name on it. I'd be embarrassed if I put my name on something that contained predictions like a "triangular design." Yes, yes, that settles it. Coming soon: the TriPad. The concept is so stupid it makes me laugh.
Secondly, we're talking about a device you handle. Besides the bezel and lip adding strength and rigidity having a handheld device that you have no choice but to have your hands blocking the display unless you support it underneath seems like a non-starter to me. Surely Apple could create a thinner iPad bezel but the current size seems good for allowing your thumbs clamp the top.
I already mentioned all handle-related use cases (e.g. book reading), can be resolved simply by having software-enabled (virtual) bezel.
Full screen use cases (video watch, board games, photo frame, etc) would utilize full area of the edge-to-edge screen.
For starters, 1mm isn't zero even though on a large TV it probably would look edge to edge. Secondly, we're talking about a device you handle. Besides the bezel and lip adding strength and rigidity having a handheld device that you have no choice but to have your hands blocking the display unless you support it underneath seems like a non-starter to me. Surely Apple could create a thinner iPad bezel but the current size seems good for allowing your thumbs clamp the top.
I believe that the strength issue can be addressed by the materials used for the display surface.
By having a wide bezel, it limits the use to a hand-held device.
If you remove the bezel it could be used, alone or in combination, as a table/desk top or wall display.
The neat part is that the user could decide and use settings to activate/deactivate and change the width of the bezel based on current needs.
When I am holding the iPad or it is in my lap, I want the bezel. When I am watching a video with the iPad propped by a stand or case, I'd rather have the larger screen.
I already mentioned all handle-related use cases (e.g. book reading), can be resolved simply by having software-enabled (virtual) bezel.
Full screen use cases (video watch, board games, photo frame, etc) would utilize full area of the edge-to-edge screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I believe that the strength issue can be addressed by the materials used for the display surface.
By having a wide bezel, it limits the use to a hand-held device.
If you remove the bezel it could be used, alone or in combination, as a table/desk top or wall display.
The neat part is that the user could decide and use settings to activate/deactivate and change the width of the bezel based on current needs.
When I am holding the iPad or it is in my lap, I want the bezel. When I am watching a video with the iPad propped by a stand or case, I'd rather have the larger screen.
So we're talking about many different things working together here. First we need tech to get the display to the very edge. Then we need materials an engineering that will make strong, rigid and durable when any significant force is placed on an edge without wearing down the display or touchscreen. Then we need software that will not only understand when we mean to hold the edge and interact with the edge. Finally, and perhaps the most complicated, we need software that will intelligently shrink and expand automatically within the OS and every app at least two sizes without being annoying to the user and without requiring much if any effort for developers.
That's why I think that video and concept is still very science fiction.
Finally, and perhaps the most complicated, we need software that will intelligently shrink and expand automatically within the OS and every app at least two sizes without being annoying to the user and without requiring much if any effort for developers.
The app part is actually the easiest and can be introduced and handled without much pain.
Assuming the resolution of the tablet was M x N, after introducing a soft-bezel it effectively becomes (M + 2m) x (N + 2n), where m/n are widths in pixels occupying vertical/horizontal bezel areas.
The old apps (unaware of the software bezels or the ones not needing one like iBooks) will keep using M x N area.
The new apps that may take advantage of full screen mode (like video players, table games, board games, photo phrame, etc) should be eventually updated to utilize bigger screen area.
But this can be done with developer's pace with no pain to the existing users.
The app part is actually the easiest and can be introduced and handled without much pain.
Assuming the resolution of the tablet was M x N, after introducing a soft-bezel it effectively becomes (M + 2m) x (N + 2n), where m/n are widths in pixels occupying vertical/horizontal bezel areas.
The old apps (unaware of the software bezels or the ones not needing one like iBooks) will keep using M x N area.
The new apps that may take advantage of full screen mode (like video players, table games, board games, photo phrame, etc) should be eventually updated to utilize bigger screen area.
But this can be done with developer's pace with no pain to the existing users.
So it would get an unintelligent shrink and expand effect that would line up pixel for pixel from one resolution to the other? I'm not following how this sounds like a good thing.
So it would get an unintelligent shrink and expand effect that would line up pixel for pixel from one resolution to the other? I'm not following how this sounds like a good thing.
No that's not what I meant. No automatic shrinks and expands. The old apps (or bezel requiring apps) are still confined in the middle M x N area with the soft-bezel turned off (or used by iOS, e.g. notifications, gestures, etc)
The new full-screen "bezel-aware" apps will have to be updated by developers (for example by increasing resolution of a background image by adding m/n pixels to it).
No that's not what I meant. No automatic shrinks and expands. The old apps (or bezel requiring apps) are still confined in the middle M x N area with the soft-bezel turned off (or used by iOS, e.g. notifications, gestures, etc)
The new full-screen "bezel-aware" apps will have to be updated by developers (for example by increasing resolution of a background image by adding m/n pixels to it).
So we're talking about a 2048x1536 display that will expand by about 400* pixels on each axis. That is 2 resolutions which is the difficult part I mentioned.
* Derived by taking slightly over a 1" diagonal with a 265 PPI that will match the reported iPad 3 to find a rough estimate of the number of pixels on each side of the bezel.
So we're talking about a 2048x1536 display that will expand by about 400* pixels on each axis. That is 2 resolutions which is the difficult part I mentioned.
Yes, "universal apps" will have to contain background images in all possible resolutions (But that's pretty much what they do anyways).
Although not all apps need background images, I would imagine board/table games would have to do that to utilize full-screen mode.
Comments
Is it just me, or is whenever a product launch approaches, AppleInsider goes crazy with low credibility rumors and then dispels them with other sources of low credibility?
Actually, it happens all year long, regardless of whether or not there's an imminent product launch.
Good stuff. I guess that settle everything!
The word "Calendar" has 8 characters that signify 8MP Camera.
http://theipad3.com/apple-ipad-3-eve...tions-decoded/
It looked like portrait. The invite is probably a mock-up and the home button got left out.
It looked like it wasn't an iPad. Either that, or somebody sure had teeny tiny fingers. Look at the size of that calendar icon. Then, put your finger near the calendar icon on your iPad. See how much smaller the icon is? I don't understand that invitation image at all, but then again, that's part of the genius of what Apple does. They do such a good job of making us wonder.
Wednesday is going to be exciting.
That is cool for a Sci-Fi perspective because it's flashy but it's practical for real world use even if that tech was feasible.
Why do you think the zero-bezel is a Sci-Fi?
Samsung and LG already make TVs with bezel as small as 1mm. The tech is surely there.
Good stuff. I guess that settle everything!
That "predictions" image is hilarious. I can't believe the guy put his name on it. I'd be embarrassed if I put my name on something that contained predictions like a "triangular design." Yes, yes, that settles it. Coming soon: the TriPad. The concept is so stupid it makes me laugh.
Why do you think the zero-bezel is a Sci-Fi?
Samsung and LG already make TVs with bezel as small as 1mm. The tech is surely there.
For starters, 1mm isn't zero even though on a large TV it probably would look edge to edge. Secondly, we're talking about a device you handle. Besides the bezel and lip adding strength and rigidity having a handheld device that you have no choice but to have your hands blocking the display unless you support it underneath seems like a non-starter to me. Surely Apple could create a thinner iPad bezel but the current size seems good for allowing your thumbs clamp the top.
That "predictions" image is hilarious. I can't believe the guy put his name on it. I'd be embarrassed if I put my name on something that contained predictions like a "triangular design." Yes, yes, that settles it. Coming soon: the TriPad. The concept is so stupid it makes me laugh.
It's suppose to be hilarious. It's satirical.
Why do you think the zero-bezel is a Sci-Fi?
Samsung and LG already make TVs with bezel as small as 1mm. The tech is surely there.
I believe that a zero bezel display will arrive in the near future.
The advantages for a video wall or massively-large TV are obvious.
The next feature will be for the displays to have a transparent state, a mirror state as well as off and active display states.
Secondly, we're talking about a device you handle. Besides the bezel and lip adding strength and rigidity having a handheld device that you have no choice but to have your hands blocking the display unless you support it underneath seems like a non-starter to me. Surely Apple could create a thinner iPad bezel but the current size seems good for allowing your thumbs clamp the top.
I already mentioned all handle-related use cases (e.g. book reading), can be resolved simply by having software-enabled (virtual) bezel.
Full screen use cases (video watch, board games, photo frame, etc) would utilize full area of the edge-to-edge screen.
For starters, 1mm isn't zero even though on a large TV it probably would look edge to edge. Secondly, we're talking about a device you handle. Besides the bezel and lip adding strength and rigidity having a handheld device that you have no choice but to have your hands blocking the display unless you support it underneath seems like a non-starter to me. Surely Apple could create a thinner iPad bezel but the current size seems good for allowing your thumbs clamp the top.
I believe that the strength issue can be addressed by the materials used for the display surface.
By having a wide bezel, it limits the use to a hand-held device.
If you remove the bezel it could be used, alone or in combination, as a table/desk top or wall display.
The neat part is that the user could decide and use settings to activate/deactivate and change the width of the bezel based on current needs.
When I am holding the iPad or it is in my lap, I want the bezel. When I am watching a video with the iPad propped by a stand or case, I'd rather have the larger screen.
Edit: @Jason98... what he said
I already mentioned all handle-related use cases (e.g. book reading), can be resolved simply by having software-enabled (virtual) bezel.
Full screen use cases (video watch, board games, photo frame, etc) would utilize full area of the edge-to-edge screen.
I believe that the strength issue can be addressed by the materials used for the display surface.
By having a wide bezel, it limits the use to a hand-held device.
If you remove the bezel it could be used, alone or in combination, as a table/desk top or wall display.
The neat part is that the user could decide and use settings to activate/deactivate and change the width of the bezel based on current needs.
When I am holding the iPad or it is in my lap, I want the bezel. When I am watching a video with the iPad propped by a stand or case, I'd rather have the larger screen.
Edit: @Jason98... what he said
So we're talking about many different things working together here. First we need tech to get the display to the very edge. Then we need materials an engineering that will make strong, rigid and durable when any significant force is placed on an edge without wearing down the display or touchscreen. Then we need software that will not only understand when we mean to hold the edge and interact with the edge. Finally, and perhaps the most complicated, we need software that will intelligently shrink and expand automatically within the OS and every app at least two sizes without being annoying to the user and without requiring much if any effort for developers.
That's why I think that video and concept is still very science fiction.
Finally, and perhaps the most complicated, we need software that will intelligently shrink and expand automatically within the OS and every app at least two sizes without being annoying to the user and without requiring much if any effort for developers.
The app part is actually the easiest and can be introduced and handled without much pain.
Assuming the resolution of the tablet was M x N, after introducing a soft-bezel it effectively becomes (M + 2m) x (N + 2n), where m/n are widths in pixels occupying vertical/horizontal bezel areas.
The old apps (unaware of the software bezels or the ones not needing one like iBooks) will keep using M x N area.
The new apps that may take advantage of full screen mode (like video players, table games, board games, photo phrame, etc) should be eventually updated to utilize bigger screen area.
But this can be done with developer's pace with no pain to the existing users.
The app part is actually the easiest and can be introduced and handled without much pain.
Assuming the resolution of the tablet was M x N, after introducing a soft-bezel it effectively becomes (M + 2m) x (N + 2n), where m/n are widths in pixels occupying vertical/horizontal bezel areas.
The old apps (unaware of the software bezels or the ones not needing one like iBooks) will keep using M x N area.
The new apps that may take advantage of full screen mode (like video players, table games, board games, photo phrame, etc) should be eventually updated to utilize bigger screen area.
But this can be done with developer's pace with no pain to the existing users.
So it would get an unintelligent shrink and expand effect that would line up pixel for pixel from one resolution to the other? I'm not following how this sounds like a good thing.
So it would get an unintelligent shrink and expand effect that would line up pixel for pixel from one resolution to the other? I'm not following how this sounds like a good thing.
No that's not what I meant. No automatic shrinks and expands. The old apps (or bezel requiring apps) are still confined in the middle M x N area with the soft-bezel turned off (or used by iOS, e.g. notifications, gestures, etc)
The new full-screen "bezel-aware" apps will have to be updated by developers (for example by increasing resolution of a background image by adding m/n pixels to it).
No that's not what I meant. No automatic shrinks and expands. The old apps (or bezel requiring apps) are still confined in the middle M x N area with the soft-bezel turned off (or used by iOS, e.g. notifications, gestures, etc)
The new full-screen "bezel-aware" apps will have to be updated by developers (for example by increasing resolution of a background image by adding m/n pixels to it).
So we're talking about a 2048x1536 display that will expand by about 400* pixels on each axis. That is 2 resolutions which is the difficult part I mentioned.
* Derived by taking slightly over a 1" diagonal with a 265 PPI that will match the reported iPad 3 to find a rough estimate of the number of pixels on each side of the bezel.
So we're talking about a 2048x1536 display that will expand by about 400* pixels on each axis. That is 2 resolutions which is the difficult part I mentioned.
Yes, "universal apps" will have to contain background images in all possible resolutions (But that's pretty much what they do anyways).
Although not all apps need background images, I would imagine board/table games would have to do that to utilize full-screen mode.
Coming soon: the TriPad. The concept is so stupid it makes me laugh.
Samsung already has that market cornered.